Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B6EC200BE4 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 16:34:21 +0100 (CET) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id 0A19A160B26; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id 55E0D160B18 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 16:34:20 +0100 (CET) Received: (qmail 55246 invoked by uid 500); 21 Dec 2016 15:34:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@ignite.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@ignite.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@ignite.apache.org Received: (qmail 55233 invoked by uid 99); 21 Dec 2016 15:34:14 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd2-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd2-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd2-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id 207CF1A0723 for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd2-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.173 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.173 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=1.2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.972] autolearn=disabled Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd2-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.9]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3o5Yq8Uftj9I for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mbob.nabble.com (mbob.nabble.com [162.253.133.15]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTP id 8DF7F5F39F for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from static.162.255.23.37.macminivault.com (unknown [162.255.23.37]) by mbob.nabble.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11BD238AB8CB for ; Wed, 21 Dec 2016 07:20:01 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 08:34:08 -0700 (MST) From: "steve.hostettler" To: user@ignite.apache.org Message-ID: <1482334448988-9681.post@n6.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1482256892526-9652.post@n6.nabble.com> References: <1482249794241-9645.post@n6.nabble.com> <1482252874149-9647.post@n6.nabble.com> <1482256892526-9652.post@n6.nabble.com> Subject: Re: LoadCache Performance decreases with the size of the cache MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit archived-at: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 15:34:21 -0000 Hi Val and thanks for the reply. I narrowed it down a little bit. The problem comes from the indexing. I tried with no indexing/query fields and then half the fields queryable and it turns out that with indexing the loading performances decrease over time. First, I would like to know whether it is expected for the performances to decrease with the size of te cache. Second, I've seen a lot of locks on the document manager of Lucene. Are there some parameters to configure? Steve -- View this message in context: http://apache-ignite-users.70518.x6.nabble.com/LoadCache-Performance-decreases-with-the-size-of-the-cache-tp9645p9681.html Sent from the Apache Ignite Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.